Anyone Believe in "MOJO"

[bucephylus]

There's no scientific research--real scientific research--supporting changes to wood at the cellular level due t the vibrations from music. This ranks up there with cable burn-in and other audiophile nonsense. Total horse hockey.

Wood ages, to be sure. That is of course well-studied.

You are correct that fundamental Materials Science studies looking at the effects of playing vs resonant properties of the components of musical instruments are not very complete. There are a few. If you search for Catgut Acoustical Society, and go to their site, you will find a few studies. But, it is true that the field is incomplete.
[Edit: I see CAS is no longer maintained and their articles no longer accessible. Stanford Library is supposed to be hosting them; but I could not access most of them. Anyhow, here is link for those interested. I'll keep looking for their references elsewhere]
CAS Forum Home Page

[Edit: For those interested, here is a link to Carleen Hutchins seminal review of violin materials and physics. It does not address questions relating to instruments being played vs not played, but does contain some interesting reading.]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

OTOH, there is a fairly compelling general perception among world class pianists and string players that very fine instruments need to be played a lot to project their best sound; and that high end instruments which do not get played tend to sound "contained." Take that for what it's worth.

To me, "Mojo" is a looks/feel thing. That's all. But, I do think that instruments that get played a lot tend to sound good.

 

[Mr_O'B]

I don't think instruments that get played a lot sound better. Some basses inherently sound better than others in my opinion even if they are identical.

 

[LowEndOperative]

Mojo is a rather subjective thing. What might be mojo to me is kaka to someone else. I have a great rig (Lakland 55-01, Ampeg PF800, Ampeg PF115LFx2) that has that mojo thing going, but there was one night it just wasn't there. Everything sounded rather thin, for some reason.

 

[mongo2]

If instrument mojo was a characteristic of an instrument, it would have to be universal. An instrument couldn't have "mojo" for some and not for others. Since, by it's very nature, it's subjective, instrument mojo simply doesn't exist.

 

[aborgman]

Too many TB members take everything literally.

My definition of Mojo doesn't mean magical powers, special voodoo, etc.......

Some basses sound better than others, and it would be hard to replace if you had to buy the same model bass or a different model with equal tone!

I (and any machinist you'll ever meet) will refer to that as "tolerance stackup", not mojo.

 

[aborgman]

I'm surprised at how many people are taking the interpretation of mojo to be some sort of magical, mystical, whimsical thing.

Probably because that is the actual dictionary definition of the word...

Mojo:
1) a magic charm, talisman, or spell.
2) magic power.

Mojo:
a magic spell, hex, or charm; broadly : magical power

 

[abarson]

Mojo does exist, but it has nothing to do with the look of the instrument i.e. reliced (real or inflicted). Looks can be deceiving.
Case in point was that I had a chance to play the P-bass owned by Steve Miller that was used on so many hits by Lonnie Turner. It was still in great condition, considering its history. Even when played on its own, I immediately got the sense that it would sit perfectly in the mix, that every studio engineer would know exactly what to do with its sound. It was heavier than I expected, translating into having a presence in my hands. I came away with the impression that this was a bass that knew who it was, and I think I probably would have had the same impression even if I hadn't known its pedigree. I'd call that "mojo".

 

[Watchootognbout]

TO CLARIFY THINGS my definition of MOJO has nothing to do with magic, voodoo, being worn, being a VINTAGE INSTRUMENT, etc......

My definition of Mojo is defined as a bass that has an inherent superior tone. If the bass had to replaced it would be difficult to find an identical model or a different model with equal tone!

I found it interesting to hear Geddy Lee say that his pawn shop bass that his signature bass is designed after has "MOJO"

I own a 1997 Fender American Deluxe with Fender Suhr electronics that sounds
incredible and has an entirely different tone than identical models.

The one thing I know for sure is that my bass has MOJO (it has nothing to do with it being an OLDER bass)!

The great Geddy Lee briefly talks about "MOJO" at the 2:05 mark in the video.

"Superior tone"is subjective.
One man's "Mojo"is another man's "Meh"

 

[Mr_O'B]

"Superior tone"is subjective.
One man's "Mojo"is another man's "Meh"

It is, but I believe there is a consensus of bass players who will agree when the tone of a particular bass is outstanding!
----------
Marcus Miller is my favorite bass player. I've seen him play his white Fender jazz bass on several Youtube videos with SMV. He generally plays his natural finish basses.
I can't put my finger on it, but I have always felt that his white Fender jazz bass lacked the amazing tone of his natural finish basses.
He still sounds like Marcus, but even Marcus Miller can't make the unspectacular white bass sound amazing like his natural finish basses.

IMO, all basses are not created equal!

Playing starts at 1:20 and 7:32 mark

 

[spade2you]

Somewhat. I have played and owned instruments with the same specs that couldn't be set up the same and/or didn't sound the same. I have also owned some of the same make/model with slightly different specs, yet a consistent sound and setup.

The trick is to set realistic goals with regards to tone and know how to do your own setups. Sure, some guitars or basses are simply duds.

 

[mongo2]

IMO, all basses are not created equal!

Sure, some guitars or basses are simply duds.

Definitely!

 

[spade2you]

Definitely!

Could we assume that mojo is essentially defined as a non-dud? If that's the case, most guitars and basses should have some mojo.

 

[mongo2]

Could we assume that mojo is essentially defined as a non-dud? If that's the case, most guitars and basses should have some mojo.

Not really. Mojo implies magic and there is no magic in instruments. Some instruments are great, most are average, and some are stinkers. Where an instrument falls in those categories is subjective. Instruments possessing mojo would mean they'd have to have it for everyone and that clearly isn't the case.

 

[Mr_O'B]

Not really. Mojo implies magic and there is no magic in instruments. Some instruments are great, most are average, and some are stinkers. Where and instrument falls in those categories is subjective. Instruments possessing mojo would mean they'd have to have it for everyone and that clearly isn't the case.

Great analogy, "Some instruments are great, most are average, and some are stinkers!"

 

[jd56hawk]

This is my mojo. It has nothing to do with being made in America, being 1 of only 100 made, or headstock logo...but a lot of that mojo comes from me.
Always, remember one thing...Be the bass!

 

[ole Jason]

Musicians love to romanticize their craft and gear. There is something inherently cool about picking up a bass made in the late 1800's. Maybe that "something" makes you practice more.